Before exploring the ethics, evidence and explanations which favor one MLDA stance over another, it is necessary to outline the reasons that have led to the enhancement of the importance that the topic under consideration commands. I believe it is essential to highlight this aspect of this argument to develop the understanding of the reader regarding the contextual background of the notion which is under consideration and I appreciate that this criteria has been fulfilled by the author in the MLDA essay.
In the MLDA essay paragraph number 2, the author discusses that for a significant proportion of the population, the enforcement of regulations which restrict alcohol consumption for individuals below the age of 21 contradicts with the ways in which society as a whole functions. A vivid example of this is associated with the fact that the American society promotes the advancement of the youth by instilling in them the tenets of progress, liberty and equality that are enjoyed by all citizens of America through the power of the vote which is granted to the citizens at the age of eighteen. I like how the author has contrasted the privileges that are granted to an individual at the age of eighteen in this paragraph because this enhances the depth of the argument by raising a critical question which argues that if a young adult is allowed and even encouraged to participate in the democratic process at this age, why do the rationalities that are linked with this judgment not apply in the case of the MLDA argument? By using the aforementioned example the author highlights the primary premise of her essay which essentially aims to analyze, assess and evaluate the implementation of age-21 laws in the United States with regards to the consumption of alcohol. The essence of this argument is rooted in displaying how our society governs the rights which are granted to the citizens of the country upon reaching the age of eighteen and how these newly bestowed responsibilities present a negation of moral, ethical and societal arguments that support the law which has enforced the age of 21, as the minimum legal drinking age in the United States. In paragraph 3 of the essay the author highlights this supposed negation or contradiction by reflecting upon the historical context of MLDA. However, she has failed to validate how these laws have contradicted themselves as she mentions that the MLDA was increased to 21 because of the loss of young lives which is a rational and logical decision on the part of the government. Unless the author had provided further evidence to substantiate her claim that MLDA laws depict a contradiction ,based on this premise, this argument can be declared weak or ineffective. Another weaknesses in author’s argument which is centered on the age of a person is that it fails to take into account that an individual’s level of psychological and emotional stability cannot be defined or categorized solely on the basis of age as the circumstances of a person’s life are also an important in this regard. Throughout the course of this essay, the author firmly stands on the idea that the stance which requests the reconsideration of MLDA is multifaceted and therefore, cannot be explored in accordance with a single perspective. I think that this aspect of the essay is highly positive because it broadens the scope of the argument by providing an insight to the reader regarding the matter. This